JAGJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.

(2.) It has been proved on the record that the appellant was absent from duty from 4.10.1990 till 10.12.1991. The lower Appellate Court has found that the department proceedings have been conducted in accordance with the rules. It has also been found that continuous absence of the respondent, who was a member of disciplined force, amounts to grave violation of police discipline. Consequently, the order of dismissal has to be up-held.

(3.) Mr. Bhandari, has vehemently argued that the order of dismissal was liable to be set aside on the ground that a perusal of the same does not indicate that the claim of the appellant for pension had been considered. In support of this submission, learned counsel has relied on the judgment of this Court in State of Punjab v. Surjit Singh, 2002 1 SCT 404.